I was reading Gamespy's short summary, and I realized that I would've really liked to have been there or to have watched it. I then realized that SpikeTV also tried something along these lines, only with celebrities instead of video game designers, but still somehow about video games. And GDC was funnier, which is to say they made one borrowed attempt at video game humor (Strongbad) that worked. By that I mean one funnier moment more than the VGA.
So, a word to the wise, or, instead, to the video gaming executives at SpikeTV who peruse slashdot (sarcasm intended): try video taping GDC next year, only leave Spade and the troupe behind and bring just two video cameras.
So what you're saying is that because Microsoft is making it easier for it's developers to develop for all of its systems, it's a monopoly? It's somehow MS' fault that Sony and Nintendo don't have a computer OS?
Is it Microsoft's fault that Sun didn't have a widely used OS? Netscape's? Yet, MS had to pay up. This situation seems remarkably similar to me, and you didn't really clarify why it's not.*
You're assuming that what they're proposing is an "Apple Box" (not quite sure what that means).
The SDK was released on Apple boxe (sorry, machines). Not sure how much more Apple-y one can get short of booting up with a quaint "ding." (See here). I'm curious, where did you see that Xbox2 is even running on "stripped versions of Windows"? The Xbox1, yes. Xbox2, I'm not so sure, and the Xbox2 was what this article was directly referring to.
* For the record, I thought the case against Microsoft was merely an attempt for states and other companies, who would've done the same thing had they been given the chance, to snag some cash. Still, I'm not sure how this is any different than taking advantage of the fact that your OS is far more distributed.
1. I have no avid, passionate, deeply ingrained hatred for Microsoft, which, compared to people around slashdot, makes me a Microsoft whore. That said, doesn't this sound exactly like Microsoft is using the fact that most people use Windows on their PCs to further the Xbox2? Essentially, because of DirectX and Windows, MS seems to be considering the PC as a sister platform to the Xbox. Seems to me this is a distinctly unfair advantage over Sony or Nintendo, both of whom obviously do not have an OS to speak of and basically have only one platform to speak of. Seems to me this is dangerous ground for Microsoft to tread, particularly after all the stink in the US they just went through and the whole EU morass that they're going through now.
2. I am no programmer, so perhaps this makes a lot more sense to someone else. But isn't it difficult to co-develop for something that will essentially be an Apple box with something that is Windows? Maybe it's the whole virtual machine thing MS picked up, but it seems kind of unlikely to me. Anyone care to explain?
I watched a "trailer" for the game, and as expected it had the generic electronicaesque guitar rock in the background, cool camera angles with a green filter, shiny clothes and sunglasses that defy gravity, and then (gasp) . . . People. Running. Around. I know it's early, but the whole thing screamed BORING. The combat looked coerced and campy, like Enter the Matrix but turn based, if you can get crappier than ETM combat.
The only thing this has going for it is that it's produced by Monolith, of Shogo/NOLF/Tron fame. It's licensed (strike one), it's the Matrix (should be worth two strikes after ETM but we'll be fair give it one), and Ubisoft dropped it amidst an ever-crowding market of pointless MMOs. Strike three?
The only way I see this title being any fun at all is if Monolith somehow works in their crisp sense of humor. The machines are developing sheep bombs, say, or the game goes into bullet time whenever someone slips on a banana peel. I, for one, would very much like to see a man-cube perform martial arts while dodging bullets in slow motion.
I'm not sure who says it, but someone spouts out sarcastically (~12mins), "Come out to Microsoft, and by the way you only have 5 months to make your game." Someone else seriously responds, "Well, it was either that or never release it and look for other jobs." It's hard to really ever tell if this was merely covering somoene's ass, but the intonation suggests that he really meant to suggest that had they not signed with Microsoft, Halo would never have been released. On one hand, I find it hard to believe given the amount of work they'd put into it. On the other hand, the fact that it had been pushed back so many times, converted from Mac to PC, and that they had still not even implemented core features of the game (ie. AI) when bought by Microsoft after all that work suggests that Commentator #2 is right. I'm sure there's a feeling within Bungie that they regret being rushed by Microsoft, but I also think that they have achieved much more acclaim and reknown than they could have with the PC version.
In other words, enough with the tearing of clothes and gnashing of teeth about how Microsoft robbed you of your precious PC treasure. The video would lead us to believe that if it wasn't for Microsoft, this may never have seen the light of day. If the mediocrity of Oni is any indication, Microsoft may (gasp) have had something to do with giving Bungie a quick kick in the rear. A nuanced listen of this video reveals that what was probably more responsible for Bungie "selling out" were the terrible PC market conditions and publishing arrangements within the PC industry. The console publishing market, while more draconian, is better organized and managed than the PC side. The notable exceptions to this in the PC market are the ones still standing (Valve, Blizzard) and that's only because they've evolved console-quality standards.
So, yeah, I know this is slashdot, and many of you believe that there's a CmdrTaco script that automatically distributes karma to a post with "MICROSOFT SUX" in it, but enough. It just makes you sound like the creepy stalker girl who drives by her ex's apt 4 times a night.
My bet is that Microsoft wishes they could get their money back.
Not that they shouldn't have known any better anyway. The decision to buy Rare always mystified me; it seems that there are so many smaller dev houses that may have been riskier, but far cheaper with potentially much greater results. I'm not even an industry insider, and I was well aware of the inter-office politics that plagued Rare in the last months before the buyout. The forum at Fatbabies was pretty much a whine-fest about office conditions inside, so it just makes me wonder if the buying of Rare was just a bet by two uppers inside Microsoft:
[NEAR WATER DISPENSER] Unnamed Xbox Employee: "Bet you you can't buy Rare."
I'm using Cloudmark's Spamnet, which is essentially what they seem to be talking about (although I didn't read all 109 pages). Seems to work well enough. It tosses about 105 spam a day for me and I have about one or two slip through that I myself block.
If you haven't already, while waiting for the Half Life 2d shooter, how's about playing some new Duke? How's that for irony!
Duke Nukem: Manhattan is actually pretty good, considering it's 2D (hard to do a decent 2D shooter these days), it's Duke, and it's on the PC. But it is really fun, and at the same time really captures the spirit of Duke Nukem. 78% at Gamerankings. A quick froogle gives me under $10, which is a fine price for this game. Not free, as in the Half Life 2d shooter - but definitely more available. Which is more than I can say for anything else Duke or Half Life related.
Can you give any other examples besides Wal-Mart? Specifically mall retail? I (couldn't, obviously), and still can't think of any. Wal-Mart is an exception because the store itself orders in bulk. 200 games on one order is an exceptional amount for an EB, and the numbers are usually closer from 20-50 per game (if that). We could, from time to time, request ordering, but it still went through a central home office distributor. A clarification then: for a company that orders in bulk but distributes smaller amounts to a store, it doesn't make sense for a manager of the store to specifically order specialized products.
Perhaps gamers are a unique breed.
They are, but I think that based on conversations with a former Camelot manager, the same thing is indicative of music enthusiasts. I doubt that you would experience the same problem of knowledge interferring with selling in a clothing store or jewelery store.
At the store I worked at, we are all knowledgable. We checked the news sites at least 2 times a day. In fact, I remember that during E3 whoever wasn't working (or actually at E3) would call up the store with news from the floor. That's is about as geeked out as one can get.
But, those kind of people are rare in gaming. And, I stand by my assertion: if it was a pure choice, I would take a better salesperson over a more knowledgable gamer. It's much easier to teach a salesperson game knowledge than it is sales knowledge to a gamer.
Perhaps you are on your way to becoming a decent manager
Not likely. After 2 years at the now defunct Electric Avenue and 3 at EB in assistant management, I am now as far as I can get from retail (grad school, history). Thank God.
I'm inclined to doubt that your association with EB Games is as "former" as you would like us to believe.
Well, if I was still with EB I wouldn't have commented at all, since EB employees are not allowed to comment publicly on the company at all. I'm not suggesting that this wasn't handled poorly. It was. I am suggesting, though, that there are really great EB stores with really great people working in them, that are hard-working, care about the customer, and are not at all representative of the home office or these poorer stores. More times than not, the home office was completely out of synch with the store in terms of customer satisfaction. I don't think that's unusual though, and is generally the indicative of home offices in generally all retail chains.
Having said that, I don't ever remember hearing about pawn laws in my store, and a previous comment from a pawnshop said that EBs are not considered pawn stores and are not subject to the same regulations (he was lamenting this and stating that they should). Personally, I would not have given back the system just because she asked, and even if they guy who stole it came in with a note saying it was stolen I would need something else. A police report might have done it, but the only way I would have sold it at cost was if she had proof of the serial number. I'm inclined to believe that she didn't, because ths story makes no mention of it. You have no idea how many people we had waiting in the wings to just rip us off. However unlikely, it's possible that this lady is one of those people. Who knows. EB certainly wouldn't have said, "This is a lady who's been trying to rip us off for years." The story is definitely too one-sided to really make a judgement call.
One, ironically, in the hills in Tennessee. Chattanooga, specifically, and was only an assistant. The Game Doctor was pretty horrid, although to be frank it generally paid for a game a month for me. GMRs did the same thing, which was kind a nice bonus.
I didn't want to suggest that there isn't a hybrid super-EB-guy who is knowledgable and works their ass off. We had several of those in our store. And, when the going was slow we would, in fact, stand around and shoot the breeze about games or movies or what we liked to subvertly call, "Code 6" - which is to say really hot girl walking by the store. Or, "code 12," which meant for someone to quietly walk into the backroom and hit the switch for circuit 12 - the demo unit circuit. You should have seen the fun we had with school field trips, the gamecube demo unit and the wavebird. Ahh, the good ole days.
I got out to go to grad school, but like yourself could have easily run a store. I miss retail, until I realize that I don't. What I do really miss are the co-workers and the regular customers; not only were the people I worked with just great people, but a lot of our weeklies were just fantastic and interesting people to get to know. I think if it were just that, the regulars, I might have stayed in retail. I'm not sure it's worth it though when you have "customers" whose apparent goal in life to is weekly figure out how to rip the store a new one by taking advantage of the return policy (even after there wasn't really one), or whine and bitch about something that isn't your fault. Oh the stories I could tell.
I was but one degree from knowing Morgan, and from what I gathered the guy was all about business. I guess that's good, but he's generally the power broker now and represents a paradigm shift in the management of EB. I think I like the nicer, gentler EB of the Firestone days. That guy was pretty great.
Just fyi, the situation he was describing had merchandise not only stacked up in the "backroom" but 6-8 feet in the employee bathroom.
That's what I meant as well. During Christmas, particularly for speciality stores like EB and Gamestop, I can assure you that this is case. I'm sure it violates some OSHA compliance of some kind, but there really was nowhere else to put the infernal stuff, particularly during system launches and Christmas. I remember when I first walked into the back room for the interview and being completely astonished by how small the back room was in proportion to the store. All the EBs I've ever seen have backrooms no larger than a small bedroom, if that. The only exception was a temporary EB in a shoe store space, and walking into their backroom was like walking into stockroom heaven. The Xbox launch for us - with the size of those original boxes - was a real hoot. Walking into the backroom (and bathroom) was like having accidently wondered into a small but highly concentrated forest of tall, black, square, and very heavy trees. Come spring cleaning and stock room reorganization in these stores, suddenly all the employees gain a intense affinity for Nintendo.
Are you suggesting that stores don't get stocked on the basis of what they need but rather on the basis of what they should have needed??
That's it exactly. What other way is there? It's much easier to examine patterns in the past to deploy inventory than it is to merely follow an employee's suggestion. Me? I would've loved to have had twenties copies of REZ the day it came out. We got two. One was bought by an employee a few days after the release, and the other by one of our regular customers. We never saw the game again. In all honesty, had we received twenty copies we may have eventually sold them, sure. But maybe not. What we did always have enough of were NCAA Footballs. Sports games, in fact, make a good case for predictability in stocking. If NCAA 2002 sold, say, 200 copies during the intial 21 days, and NCAA 2003 sold 250 copies, it's safe to say that that particular store may need upwards 300 copies for NCAA 2004.
Does this mean that from time to time, there are stores that have extras and stores that are out? Well sure it does. What would happen in our district is that the district manager would quickly shift inventory between stores to compensate on a local level, while the predictive system - which is now showing a quickly sold out inventory in that second store - ships extra quantities as well. I can't say for certain, but I'd imagine a similar process happens at Amazon, be it by computer or by human. If Futurama Season 1 sold X amount of DVDs, you can rest assured that Futurama Season 2 will probably sell in the same ballpark.
I'm not sure what you're suggesting, but there's not another way to do it. While not perfect, from what I understand in having talked to longtime customers of EB (upwards 5 years), the system now used by both EB and Gamestop is far preferable to what it was before, when it was humans deciding what they needed.
First, Dragoon412 is describing every retail store. During peak periods, for example, "this past holiday season", there's not a retail store anywhere that's backroom is not stocked "6 to 8 feet in the employee bathroom for lack of anywhere else to put merchandise." That's because it was Christmas. 20-box deliveries are normal, but only during Christmas.
Moreover, I can't really think of any retail chain that specifically allows its individual stores to order individual products. Specific ordering on a store level for any chain that buys in bulk is an inventory management nightmare and would come at nothing less than a huge cost, and therefore price, increase.
Why the low emphasis on gaming knowledge? As a former EB assistant manager, I'll tell you. Typically, people who "know about games" don't work. They sit on their asses during paid hours and talk about games with other people you've hired that "know about games." Nine times out of ten, you hire a guy who is "knowledgeable" and you've hired a poor worker. They don't sell. They don't work. They talk about games. They're elist and will, quite undiplomatically, tell customers that the game that customer has brought to the counter "sucks." Give me a good salesperson over a knowledgable gamer any day. That's not to suggest that a good salesperson will not learn about the product she sells. She will. But the ones who write on their application "I know a lot about video games because I've been playing them 5 hours a day since I was five" are not the people you want working in your store, because, simply, they won't work.
In reference both to Dragoon412's comment and to the original article, there is little consistency of quality between any retail chain. I think the EB I worked at was run extremely tightly, with an emphasis on professionalism, politeness, and gaming knowledge. I've been to other EBs where that is definitly not the case, which is just like any other retail chain. They're highly dependent on the personality and drive of the manager. Surprise.
Secondly, as already stated, EB is not the same store as Gamestop. While Babbages/Gamestop - which are all owned by Barnes and Noble - might use DOS still, EB does not use a DOS-based POS. While they are now in the minority, when I worked at EB in the mall I noticed that many other retail stores are still on rudimentory POS. What does that have to do with selling inside the safety period mentioned in the article, or even running a good store? Not a damn thing. A good manager and employees can run a tight, strong, customer-centric store with a pen and a pad (as once nightmaringly demonstrated at my store on a Black Friday).
Yes, you'll find game stores that are run horribly, as the article so acutely demonstrates. You might have to look hard, but what you will eventually also find, though, are hard working people in EB (and presumably Gamestop) who care about their work and their customers. I know I sound like I'm pitching the company line here. Nevertheless, I have as many anti-corporate Steven Morgan jokes as the next guy. Dragoon421's "EB" store and the one in the article are individual stores not indicative of the entire company.
Saw Apple, Mini, and review, and my brain somehow inferred quite independently of actually reading that Appleseed was a new video player device from Apple. After having read the actual post and visited the website, I have to say that an Apple video player was a heck of a lot more exciting, although it would probably really be named iSeed if it were truly an Apple product.
McDonalds also announced today that as of September 20th 2004, children will open the bags of purchased Happy Meals and find within McDonald's own McXPlayCube, which will, according to PR Vice-President H. Burgalar "continue to establish McDonalds as a major player not only in beef preparation, but also the increasingly popular video gaming market."
In response, Billy Gray, the 12 year old kid down the street, has stated that he plans to counter McDonalds's advance into console market with a "Whoop-ass beast of a machine that's motto will be 'All GTA All The Time.'" In what will no doubt be a welcomed change to the console market, this will not be a "box" like Scientific-Atlanta's console, but a "cool little ball of circuits in liquid that can also double as a hackey-sac."
Bigbigbison makes a good point here that I'd like to elaborate on.
Basically, the gaming media blows chunks. Not only should the issue be, "Where are the grilling questions to Spector" but extended, "Where are the grilling questions TO ANYONE." I have yet to really see some nice "journalism" in gaming. When we do have it, it is from the lower level gaming sites, such as the work by HardOCP on Infinium (kudos to them). EGM was all over Enter the Matrix and Dave Perry like prom night before the game came out, spilling their orgasmic spew of screenshots and quote-y blurbs throughout the centerfold of that issue. But when the game bombed, EGM resorted only to cowardly making scattered funnies here and there throughout the issues that followed. What they should have done is sent one of their writers to the doors of Shiny and camped outside with a pen and notepad like Harry Knowles for Obscure-Comic-Book-Superhero-Movie until they could "grill" Perry, instead of taking lame-ass joke-shots at him from the safety of their own pages.
The fact is, Spector has given dozens of interviews since the release of DE:IW, but no one has the balls to really ask him the hard questions. When these magazines interview someone from a dev house that puts out a bug-infested game, the first question on the lips of the media should not be, "Ooo what goody goody game is coming out next tell us more give us screen shots! Mmmmm...screenshotss......" It should be holding the gaming houses accountable, the first question should be, "Why did your game crash computers? Did you know it would?." Etc. They might rely on people like Spector for interviews and advertising, but at the bottom of the structure supporting the gaming meda are the readers and it's to us that they ought to be directly serving.
That's not even taking into account some of the more culturally relevant issues that are largely going ignored, like the treatment of war and Vietnam or Iraq by gaming publishers, for example. Why hasn't someone done a printed piece on why minorities are all but ignored in anything save sports video games? Why aren't our magazine writers playing the role press and critics are supposed to play and holding the publishers to the wall?
Video gaming is, by and large, still infant and immature, and part of this is because our gaming media is more immature than the audience. Gaming isn't taken seriously by overall culture as is the case with film, writing, or visual arts, because our representatives, the gaming media, don't act seriously. If they're not big nerds (the bad kind), they're acting like them when, for example, they allow events like E3 to parade around objectified women to advertise games. We've never really advanced beyond the Nintendo Power stage of writing. There is a place for this kind of amateurism, sure, as there is in any viable medium, be it books or film or otherwise. But we have nothing else to speak of save that. That's sad, and it bodes poorly for the maturation of an industry and an artform.
Someone really needs to smack these writers in the head with a large, heavy, and basic journalism textbook so that maybe, maybe!, they'll snap out of their adolescent obsession with ratings and screenshots and start acting like journalists and writers. That is to say, as journalists quote-unquote, they have a legacy behind them of cultural accountability that they have all but ignored because a sequel to Game X is coming out and just looks so AWESOME DUDE. It's time to start thinking about the games we're playing, and it's in the hands of the gaming media that the initiative lies. They've all but ignored it, as sadly demonstrated by the mentioned interview with Spector.
Just one print magazine or website is all I ask for. Here's hoping.
I thought the article was well written. However, calling the media any one thing sounds remarkably like the political camps in the United States saying that the media is exactly opposite of whatever political persuasion they're coming from. "The media is completely liberal!" cries Rush Limbaugh and, well, Fox News. "It's completely conservative!" cries (shouts, perhaps) Howard Dean, or Michael Moore.
So it comes as no surprise that there's an article saying there's bias against the Gamecube, when this is probably not true as most of the console gaming press have chosen a Gamecube for their game of the year for the last two or three years. I have no doubt that Microsoft could very well prove anti-Microsoft bias in the media, especially in the beginning of its lifespan. Anyone remember why Halo surprised everyone? It was because the press generally trashed it from E3 onward. No doubt Sony, too, has had its moments, also particularly in the beginning of the PSX or PS2 cycle lifespan.
As my dad used to say when I whined about my little brother getting something I felt I ought to have, "Cry me a river." You'll always be able to find a bias in the press, because the press is as varied as the community it serves. Duh. I could probably find bias in the gaming media against flossing teeth. Which would be kind of gross, but probably true.
If there's a bias in the media, it's because Microsoft is an American company, and knows how to work the American press. Surprise. Sam Altersitz has no problem claiming Japanese sales number in his article, thus opening his table of study to Japan. But I see absolutely no mention of the Japanese press whatsoever, and while I've probably read as much Japanese press as Altersitz, which is to say none, I'm inclined to believe that Microsoft would be highly justified in claiming in that the Japanese press is extremely anti-Microsoft. Why? Because Microsoft has absolutely no idea how to "press" the Japanese. So why is it a shock that Nintendo, which always seems to be off a wavelength in relation to the American press anyway, is worse at convincing particularly the mainstream press that it is "winning" the console war?
Either way, it doesn't matter. I appreciate the amount of thought and time and research that Sam put into the article, but the answer to why the press seems slanted is obvious. It is, but it's also slanted for the Gamecube as much it is against it, it's just so varied that it's easy to say it's for or against anything. And if there is a slant, that slant doesn't take into consideration the Japanese press nor the obvious advantage Microsoft has in home turf.
You're completely right here. When I look at a game I shouldn't be constantly thinking, Oh Gee, this would be cool if this game did this more often than I am impressed by what the game is doing. More so for a game that hasn't even been released. There's no doubt in my mind that City of Heroes should have absolutely had the choice between good and evil, especially in a post-GTA gaming world.
The lack of stylized graphics will also hurt Heroes. The characters look comic-booky, but that's about it. There's really nothing distinctive I've seen in the screenshots that makes me think, "Hey, that's a comic book."
I think it's fairly obvious by now that the major publishers suddenly woke up sometime in late January and said, "Hey, there is no market for MMOs!" Microsoft canceling Mythica and Ubisoft dropping Uru and Matrix Online are demonstrative of the sudden realization that MMOs are not the goldmine they were once perceived as.
Personally, I hope City of Heros does well, if only to further the cause of good superhero games, that is (assuming that it is good). The post by weasel to this story makes a good case for a wasted opportunity by the makers of City of Heroes on not creating a highly stylized and "mood-inducing" game, though. Also, the this-game-is-simple angle might work, but I wonder how many people will justify paying $49.99 + $X/month for game that seems to lack depth. Simplicity as an extension of a way to capture that ever-elusive mainstream market surely didn't help either Uru or the Sims Online. Moreover, my guess is that in terms of polish and accesible design, any game that's out now probably won't stand much of a chance against Blizzard's World of Warcraft.
My guess is that City of Heroes barely missed the cut. I can't help but wonder that if City of Heroes were anything but almost finished, NCSoft, or any smart publisher, would have pulled the plug on it.
I'm interested: what discipline (and level of education) do you find yourself in? The above posts are right; ludology (study of gaming) would fall quite squarely under an English department, but more specifically under the burgeoning cultural studies. I'm a historian, and what you call the "walmartization" of education, we call "social" or "cultural" history. We reviewed several canidates for positions in our department just recently, and most of them identified themselves as social historians. One, whom would, no doubt, classify in your "walmartization," spent his dissertation studying the drinking habits of the British during the 19th century. Is anyone in our discipline studying video games? Not yet, but rest assured we will be.
But the physicality of the quarter doesn't make anything more certain.
Well sure it does. You yourself said that he's going to probably give me a free game, and while the physicality of the quarter may not necessarily help in that situation, my own physical presence does. He knows, because I stand in front of him, that this is not the 1037th time I've tried to steal a game. But with physical presence removed and replaced with equal amounts of anonymity, the content producer has to assume that every person who wants a free claim is, in fact, doing it for the 1037th time with a script.
The same could be said of any kind of online payment system, to be sure, from McCloud's dream arcade to Amazon.com to ebay. But the difference with micropayments, and particularly in the online gaming he's talking about where there is no physical product whatsoever, is that the dangers associated with online payments are exponentially increased.
With regards to my assertion that the Pac-McCloud virtual arcade cabinet can "steal" a quarter while a physical one cannot, you're right. You would have to activate it. But after you do that, your pocket's open, right?
Slashdot Mirror
Stuff like this is why gamers need a Daily Show, but for games. Or like Old Man Murray, but updated.
I was reading Gamespy's short summary, and I realized that I would've really liked to have been there or to have watched it. I then realized that SpikeTV also tried something along these lines, only with celebrities instead of video game designers, but still somehow about video games. And GDC was funnier, which is to say they made one borrowed attempt at video game humor (Strongbad) that worked. By that I mean one funnier moment more than the VGA.
So, a word to the wise, or, instead, to the video gaming executives at SpikeTV who peruse slashdot (sarcasm intended): try video taping GDC next year, only leave Spade and the troupe behind and bring just two video cameras.
So what you're saying is that because Microsoft is making it easier for it's developers to develop for all of its systems, it's a monopoly? It's somehow MS' fault that Sony and Nintendo don't have a computer OS?
Is it Microsoft's fault that Sun didn't have a widely used OS? Netscape's? Yet, MS had to pay up. This situation seems remarkably similar to me, and you didn't really clarify why it's not.*
You're assuming that what they're proposing is an "Apple Box" (not quite sure what that means).
The SDK was released on Apple boxe (sorry, machines). Not sure how much more Apple-y one can get short of booting up with a quaint "ding." (See here). I'm curious, where did you see that Xbox2 is even running on "stripped versions of Windows"? The Xbox1, yes. Xbox2, I'm not so sure, and the Xbox2 was what this article was directly referring to.
* For the record, I thought the case against Microsoft was merely an attempt for states and other companies, who would've done the same thing had they been given the chance, to snag some cash. Still, I'm not sure how this is any different than taking advantage of the fact that your OS is far more distributed.
Two things.
1. I have no avid, passionate, deeply ingrained hatred for Microsoft, which, compared to people around slashdot, makes me a Microsoft whore. That said, doesn't this sound exactly like Microsoft is using the fact that most people use Windows on their PCs to further the Xbox2? Essentially, because of DirectX and Windows, MS seems to be considering the PC as a sister platform to the Xbox. Seems to me this is a distinctly unfair advantage over Sony or Nintendo, both of whom obviously do not have an OS to speak of and basically have only one platform to speak of. Seems to me this is dangerous ground for Microsoft to tread, particularly after all the stink in the US they just went through and the whole EU morass that they're going through now.
2. I am no programmer, so perhaps this makes a lot more sense to someone else. But isn't it difficult to co-develop for something that will essentially be an Apple box with something that is Windows? Maybe it's the whole virtual machine thing MS picked up, but it seems kind of unlikely to me. Anyone care to explain?
I watched a "trailer" for the game, and as expected it had the generic electronicaesque guitar rock in the background, cool camera angles with a green filter, shiny clothes and sunglasses that defy gravity, and then (gasp) . . . People. Running. Around. I know it's early, but the whole thing screamed BORING. The combat looked coerced and campy, like Enter the Matrix but turn based, if you can get crappier than ETM combat.
The only thing this has going for it is that it's produced by Monolith, of Shogo/NOLF/Tron fame. It's licensed (strike one), it's the Matrix (should be worth two strikes after ETM but we'll be fair give it one), and Ubisoft dropped it amidst an ever-crowding market of pointless MMOs. Strike three?
The only way I see this title being any fun at all is if Monolith somehow works in their crisp sense of humor. The machines are developing sheep bombs, say, or the game goes into bullet time whenever someone slips on a banana peel. I, for one, would very much like to see a man-cube perform martial arts while dodging bullets in slow motion.
This seems about as smart an idea as Monopoly: The First Person Shooter.
Sshh! Don't give the Electronic Arts lead designer lurkers any ideas!
I'm not sure who says it, but someone spouts out sarcastically (~12mins), "Come out to Microsoft, and by the way you only have 5 months to make your game." Someone else seriously responds, "Well, it was either that or never release it and look for other jobs." It's hard to really ever tell if this was merely covering somoene's ass, but the intonation suggests that he really meant to suggest that had they not signed with Microsoft, Halo would never have been released. On one hand, I find it hard to believe given the amount of work they'd put into it. On the other hand, the fact that it had been pushed back so many times, converted from Mac to PC, and that they had still not even implemented core features of the game (ie. AI) when bought by Microsoft after all that work suggests that Commentator #2 is right. I'm sure there's a feeling within Bungie that they regret being rushed by Microsoft, but I also think that they have achieved much more acclaim and reknown than they could have with the PC version.
In other words, enough with the tearing of clothes and gnashing of teeth about how Microsoft robbed you of your precious PC treasure. The video would lead us to believe that if it wasn't for Microsoft, this may never have seen the light of day. If the mediocrity of Oni is any indication, Microsoft may (gasp) have had something to do with giving Bungie a quick kick in the rear. A nuanced listen of this video reveals that what was probably more responsible for Bungie "selling out" were the terrible PC market conditions and publishing arrangements within the PC industry. The console publishing market, while more draconian, is better organized and managed than the PC side. The notable exceptions to this in the PC market are the ones still standing (Valve, Blizzard) and that's only because they've evolved console-quality standards.
So, yeah, I know this is slashdot, and many of you believe that there's a CmdrTaco script that automatically distributes karma to a post with "MICROSOFT SUX" in it, but enough. It just makes you sound like the creepy stalker girl who drives by her ex's apt 4 times a night.
My bet is that Microsoft wishes they could get their money back.
Not that they shouldn't have known any better anyway. The decision to buy Rare always mystified me; it seems that there are so many smaller dev houses that may have been riskier, but far cheaper with potentially much greater results. I'm not even an industry insider, and I was well aware of the inter-office politics that plagued Rare in the last months before the buyout. The forum at Fatbabies was pretty much a whine-fest about office conditions inside, so it just makes me wonder if the buying of Rare was just a bet by two uppers inside Microsoft:
[NEAR WATER DISPENSER]
Unnamed Xbox Employee: "Bet you you can't buy Rare."
Ed Fries: "Bet you I can."
I'm using Cloudmark's Spamnet, which is essentially what they seem to be talking about (although I didn't read all 109 pages). Seems to work well enough. It tosses about 105 spam a day for me and I have about one or two slip through that I myself block.
. . . Infinium is, no doubt, already planning a legal strategy to sue the BBC for not even placing the Phantom on the list.
If you haven't already, while waiting for the Half Life 2d shooter, how's about playing some new Duke? How's that for irony!
Duke Nukem: Manhattan is actually pretty good, considering it's 2D (hard to do a decent 2D shooter these days), it's Duke, and it's on the PC. But it is really fun, and at the same time really captures the spirit of Duke Nukem. 78% at Gamerankings. A quick froogle gives me under $10, which is a fine price for this game. Not free, as in the Half Life 2d shooter - but definitely more available. Which is more than I can say for anything else Duke or Half Life related.
WALMART
Can you give any other examples besides Wal-Mart? Specifically mall retail? I (couldn't, obviously), and still can't think of any. Wal-Mart is an exception because the store itself orders in bulk. 200 games on one order is an exceptional amount for an EB, and the numbers are usually closer from 20-50 per game (if that). We could, from time to time, request ordering, but it still went through a central home office distributor. A clarification then: for a company that orders in bulk but distributes smaller amounts to a store, it doesn't make sense for a manager of the store to specifically order specialized products.
Perhaps gamers are a unique breed.
They are, but I think that based on conversations with a former Camelot manager, the same thing is indicative of music enthusiasts. I doubt that you would experience the same problem of knowledge interferring with selling in a clothing store or jewelery store.
At the store I worked at, we are all knowledgable. We checked the news sites at least 2 times a day. In fact, I remember that during E3 whoever wasn't working (or actually at E3) would call up the store with news from the floor. That's is about as geeked out as one can get.
But, those kind of people are rare in gaming. And, I stand by my assertion: if it was a pure choice, I would take a better salesperson over a more knowledgable gamer. It's much easier to teach a salesperson game knowledge than it is sales knowledge to a gamer.
Perhaps you are on your way to becoming a decent manager
Not likely. After 2 years at the now defunct Electric Avenue and 3 at EB in assistant management, I am now as far as I can get from retail (grad school, history). Thank God.
I'm inclined to doubt that your association with EB Games is as "former" as you would like us to believe.
Well, if I was still with EB I wouldn't have commented at all, since EB employees are not allowed to comment publicly on the company at all. I'm not suggesting that this wasn't handled poorly. It was. I am suggesting, though, that there are really great EB stores with really great people working in them, that are hard-working, care about the customer, and are not at all representative of the home office or these poorer stores. More times than not, the home office was completely out of synch with the store in terms of customer satisfaction. I don't think that's unusual though, and is generally the indicative of home offices in generally all retail chains.
Having said that, I don't ever remember hearing about pawn laws in my store, and a previous comment from a pawnshop said that EBs are not considered pawn stores and are not subject to the same regulations (he was lamenting this and stating that they should). Personally, I would not have given back the system just because she asked, and even if they guy who stole it came in with a note saying it was stolen I would need something else. A police report might have done it, but the only way I would have sold it at cost was if she had proof of the serial number. I'm inclined to believe that she didn't, because ths story makes no mention of it. You have no idea how many people we had waiting in the wings to just rip us off. However unlikely, it's possible that this lady is one of those people. Who knows. EB certainly wouldn't have said, "This is a lady who's been trying to rip us off for years." The story is definitely too one-sided to really make a judgement call.
Incidentally, which store did you run?
One, ironically, in the hills in Tennessee. Chattanooga, specifically, and was only an assistant. The Game Doctor was pretty horrid, although to be frank it generally paid for a game a month for me. GMRs did the same thing, which was kind a nice bonus.
I didn't want to suggest that there isn't a hybrid super-EB-guy who is knowledgable and works their ass off. We had several of those in our store. And, when the going was slow we would, in fact, stand around and shoot the breeze about games or movies or what we liked to subvertly call, "Code 6" - which is to say really hot girl walking by the store. Or, "code 12," which meant for someone to quietly walk into the backroom and hit the switch for circuit 12 - the demo unit circuit. You should have seen the fun we had with school field trips, the gamecube demo unit and the wavebird. Ahh, the good ole days.
I got out to go to grad school, but like yourself could have easily run a store. I miss retail, until I realize that I don't. What I do really miss are the co-workers and the regular customers; not only were the people I worked with just great people, but a lot of our weeklies were just fantastic and interesting people to get to know. I think if it were just that, the regulars, I might have stayed in retail. I'm not sure it's worth it though when you have "customers" whose apparent goal in life to is weekly figure out how to rip the store a new one by taking advantage of the return policy (even after there wasn't really one), or whine and bitch about something that isn't your fault. Oh the stories I could tell.
I was but one degree from knowing Morgan, and from what I gathered the guy was all about business. I guess that's good, but he's generally the power broker now and represents a paradigm shift in the management of EB. I think I like the nicer, gentler EB of the Firestone days. That guy was pretty great.
Just fyi, the situation he was describing had merchandise not only stacked up in the "backroom" but 6-8 feet in the employee bathroom.
That's what I meant as well. During Christmas, particularly for speciality stores like EB and Gamestop, I can assure you that this is case. I'm sure it violates some OSHA compliance of some kind, but there really was nowhere else to put the infernal stuff, particularly during system launches and Christmas. I remember when I first walked into the back room for the interview and being completely astonished by how small the back room was in proportion to the store. All the EBs I've ever seen have backrooms no larger than a small bedroom, if that. The only exception was a temporary EB in a shoe store space, and walking into their backroom was like walking into stockroom heaven. The Xbox launch for us - with the size of those original boxes - was a real hoot. Walking into the backroom (and bathroom) was like having accidently wondered into a small but highly concentrated forest of tall, black, square, and very heavy trees. Come spring cleaning and stock room reorganization in these stores, suddenly all the employees gain a intense affinity for Nintendo.
Are you suggesting that stores don't get stocked on the basis of what they need but rather on the basis of what they should have needed??
That's it exactly. What other way is there? It's much easier to examine patterns in the past to deploy inventory than it is to merely follow an employee's suggestion. Me? I would've loved to have had twenties copies of REZ the day it came out. We got two. One was bought by an employee a few days after the release, and the other by one of our regular customers. We never saw the game again. In all honesty, had we received twenty copies we may have eventually sold them, sure. But maybe not. What we did always have enough of were NCAA Footballs. Sports games, in fact, make a good case for predictability in stocking. If NCAA 2002 sold, say, 200 copies during the intial 21 days, and NCAA 2003 sold 250 copies, it's safe to say that that particular store may need upwards 300 copies for NCAA 2004.
Does this mean that from time to time, there are stores that have extras and stores that are out? Well sure it does. What would happen in our district is that the district manager would quickly shift inventory between stores to compensate on a local level, while the predictive system - which is now showing a quickly sold out inventory in that second store - ships extra quantities as well. I can't say for certain, but I'd imagine a similar process happens at Amazon, be it by computer or by human. If Futurama Season 1 sold X amount of DVDs, you can rest assured that Futurama Season 2 will probably sell in the same ballpark.
I'm not sure what you're suggesting, but there's not another way to do it. While not perfect, from what I understand in having talked to longtime customers of EB (upwards 5 years), the system now used by both EB and Gamestop is far preferable to what it was before, when it was humans deciding what they needed.
First, Dragoon412 is describing every retail store. During peak periods, for example, "this past holiday season", there's not a retail store anywhere that's backroom is not stocked "6 to 8 feet in the employee bathroom for lack of anywhere else to put merchandise." That's because it was Christmas. 20-box deliveries are normal, but only during Christmas.
Moreover, I can't really think of any retail chain that specifically allows its individual stores to order individual products. Specific ordering on a store level for any chain that buys in bulk is an inventory management nightmare and would come at nothing less than a huge cost, and therefore price, increase.
Why the low emphasis on gaming knowledge? As a former EB assistant manager, I'll tell you. Typically, people who "know about games" don't work. They sit on their asses during paid hours and talk about games with other people you've hired that "know about games." Nine times out of ten, you hire a guy who is "knowledgeable" and you've hired a poor worker. They don't sell. They don't work. They talk about games. They're elist and will, quite undiplomatically, tell customers that the game that customer has brought to the counter "sucks." Give me a good salesperson over a knowledgable gamer any day. That's not to suggest that a good salesperson will not learn about the product she sells. She will. But the ones who write on their application "I know a lot about video games because I've been playing them 5 hours a day since I was five" are not the people you want working in your store, because, simply, they won't work.
In reference both to Dragoon412's comment and to the original article, there is little consistency of quality between any retail chain. I think the EB I worked at was run extremely tightly, with an emphasis on professionalism, politeness, and gaming knowledge. I've been to other EBs where that is definitly not the case, which is just like any other retail chain. They're highly dependent on the personality and drive of the manager. Surprise.
Secondly, as already stated, EB is not the same store as Gamestop. While Babbages/Gamestop - which are all owned by Barnes and Noble - might use DOS still, EB does not use a DOS-based POS. While they are now in the minority, when I worked at EB in the mall I noticed that many other retail stores are still on rudimentory POS. What does that have to do with selling inside the safety period mentioned in the article, or even running a good store? Not a damn thing. A good manager and employees can run a tight, strong, customer-centric store with a pen and a pad (as once nightmaringly demonstrated at my store on a Black Friday).
Yes, you'll find game stores that are run horribly, as the article so acutely demonstrates. You might have to look hard, but what you will eventually also find, though, are hard working people in EB (and presumably Gamestop) who care about their work and their customers. I know I sound like I'm pitching the company line here. Nevertheless, I have as many anti-corporate Steven Morgan jokes as the next guy. Dragoon421's "EB" store and the one in the article are individual stores not indicative of the entire company.
Saw Apple, Mini, and review, and my brain somehow inferred quite independently of actually reading that Appleseed was a new video player device from Apple. After having read the actual post and visited the website, I have to say that an Apple video player was a heck of a lot more exciting, although it would probably really be named iSeed if it were truly an Apple product.
Oh well.
McDonalds also announced today that as of September 20th 2004, children will open the bags of purchased Happy Meals and find within McDonald's own McXPlayCube, which will, according to PR Vice-President H. Burgalar "continue to establish McDonalds as a major player not only in beef preparation, but also the increasingly popular video gaming market."
In response, Billy Gray, the 12 year old kid down the street, has stated that he plans to counter McDonalds's advance into console market with a "Whoop-ass beast of a machine that's motto will be 'All GTA All The Time.'" In what will no doubt be a welcomed change to the console market, this will not be a "box" like Scientific-Atlanta's console, but a "cool little ball of circuits in liquid that can also double as a hackey-sac."
Bigbigbison makes a good point here that I'd like to elaborate on.
Basically, the gaming media blows chunks. Not only should the issue be, "Where are the grilling questions to Spector" but extended, "Where are the grilling questions TO ANYONE." I have yet to really see some nice "journalism" in gaming. When we do have it, it is from the lower level gaming sites, such as the work by HardOCP on Infinium (kudos to them). EGM was all over Enter the Matrix and Dave Perry like prom night before the game came out, spilling their orgasmic spew of screenshots and quote-y blurbs throughout the centerfold of that issue. But when the game bombed, EGM resorted only to cowardly making scattered funnies here and there throughout the issues that followed. What they should have done is sent one of their writers to the doors of Shiny and camped outside with a pen and notepad like Harry Knowles for Obscure-Comic-Book-Superhero-Movie until they could "grill" Perry, instead of taking lame-ass joke-shots at him from the safety of their own pages.
The fact is, Spector has given dozens of interviews since the release of DE:IW, but no one has the balls to really ask him the hard questions. When these magazines interview someone from a dev house that puts out a bug-infested game, the first question on the lips of the media should not be, "Ooo what goody goody game is coming out next tell us more give us screen shots! Mmmmm...screenshotss......" It should be holding the gaming houses accountable, the first question should be, "Why did your game crash computers? Did you know it would?." Etc. They might rely on people like Spector for interviews and advertising, but at the bottom of the structure supporting the gaming meda are the readers and it's to us that they ought to be directly serving.
That's not even taking into account some of the more culturally relevant issues that are largely going ignored, like the treatment of war and Vietnam or Iraq by gaming publishers, for example. Why hasn't someone done a printed piece on why minorities are all but ignored in anything save sports video games? Why aren't our magazine writers playing the role press and critics are supposed to play and holding the publishers to the wall?
Video gaming is, by and large, still infant and immature, and part of this is because our gaming media is more immature than the audience. Gaming isn't taken seriously by overall culture as is the case with film, writing, or visual arts, because our representatives, the gaming media, don't act seriously. If they're not big nerds (the bad kind), they're acting like them when, for example, they allow events like E3 to parade around objectified women to advertise games. We've never really advanced beyond the Nintendo Power stage of writing. There is a place for this kind of amateurism, sure, as there is in any viable medium, be it books or film or otherwise. But we have nothing else to speak of save that. That's sad, and it bodes poorly for the maturation of an industry and an artform.
Someone really needs to smack these writers in the head with a large, heavy, and basic journalism textbook so that maybe, maybe!, they'll snap out of their adolescent obsession with ratings and screenshots and start acting like journalists and writers. That is to say, as journalists quote-unquote, they have a legacy behind them of cultural accountability that they have all but ignored because a sequel to Game X is coming out and just looks so AWESOME DUDE. It's time to start thinking about the games we're playing, and it's in the hands of the gaming media that the initiative lies. They've all but ignored it, as sadly demonstrated by the mentioned interview with Spector.
Just one print magazine or website is all I ask for. Here's hoping.
I thought the article was well written. However, calling the media any one thing sounds remarkably like the political camps in the United States saying that the media is exactly opposite of whatever political persuasion they're coming from. "The media is completely liberal!" cries Rush Limbaugh and, well, Fox News. "It's completely conservative!" cries (shouts, perhaps) Howard Dean, or Michael Moore.
So it comes as no surprise that there's an article saying there's bias against the Gamecube, when this is probably not true as most of the console gaming press have chosen a Gamecube for their game of the year for the last two or three years. I have no doubt that Microsoft could very well prove anti-Microsoft bias in the media, especially in the beginning of its lifespan. Anyone remember why Halo surprised everyone? It was because the press generally trashed it from E3 onward. No doubt Sony, too, has had its moments, also particularly in the beginning of the PSX or PS2 cycle lifespan.
As my dad used to say when I whined about my little brother getting something I felt I ought to have, "Cry me a river." You'll always be able to find a bias in the press, because the press is as varied as the community it serves. Duh. I could probably find bias in the gaming media against flossing teeth. Which would be kind of gross, but probably true.
If there's a bias in the media, it's because Microsoft is an American company, and knows how to work the American press. Surprise. Sam Altersitz has no problem claiming Japanese sales number in his article, thus opening his table of study to Japan. But I see absolutely no mention of the Japanese press whatsoever, and while I've probably read as much Japanese press as Altersitz, which is to say none, I'm inclined to believe that Microsoft would be highly justified in claiming in that the Japanese press is extremely anti-Microsoft. Why? Because Microsoft has absolutely no idea how to "press" the Japanese. So why is it a shock that Nintendo, which always seems to be off a wavelength in relation to the American press anyway, is worse at convincing particularly the mainstream press that it is "winning" the console war?
Either way, it doesn't matter. I appreciate the amount of thought and time and research that Sam put into the article, but the answer to why the press seems slanted is obvious. It is, but it's also slanted for the Gamecube as much it is against it, it's just so varied that it's easy to say it's for or against anything. And if there is a slant, that slant doesn't take into consideration the Japanese press nor the obvious advantage Microsoft has in home turf.
There's this little problem of no PC villians.
You're completely right here. When I look at a game I shouldn't be constantly thinking, Oh Gee, this would be cool if this game did this more often than I am impressed by what the game is doing. More so for a game that hasn't even been released. There's no doubt in my mind that City of Heroes should have absolutely had the choice between good and evil, especially in a post-GTA gaming world.
The lack of stylized graphics will also hurt Heroes. The characters look comic-booky, but that's about it. There's really nothing distinctive I've seen in the screenshots that makes me think, "Hey, that's a comic book."
I think it's fairly obvious by now that the major publishers suddenly woke up sometime in late January and said, "Hey, there is no market for MMOs!" Microsoft canceling Mythica and Ubisoft dropping Uru and Matrix Online are demonstrative of the sudden realization that MMOs are not the goldmine they were once perceived as.
Personally, I hope City of Heros does well, if only to further the cause of good superhero games, that is (assuming that it is good). The post by weasel to this story makes a good case for a wasted opportunity by the makers of City of Heroes on not creating a highly stylized and "mood-inducing" game, though. Also, the this-game-is-simple angle might work, but I wonder how many people will justify paying $49.99 + $X/month for game that seems to lack depth. Simplicity as an extension of a way to capture that ever-elusive mainstream market surely didn't help either Uru or the Sims Online. Moreover, my guess is that in terms of polish and accesible design, any game that's out now probably won't stand much of a chance against Blizzard's World of Warcraft.
My guess is that City of Heroes barely missed the cut. I can't help but wonder that if City of Heroes were anything but almost finished, NCSoft, or any smart publisher, would have pulled the plug on it.
I'm interested: what discipline (and level of education) do you find yourself in? The above posts are right; ludology (study of gaming) would fall quite squarely under an English department, but more specifically under the burgeoning cultural studies. I'm a historian, and what you call the "walmartization" of education, we call "social" or "cultural" history. We reviewed several canidates for positions in our department just recently, and most of them identified themselves as social historians. One, whom would, no doubt, classify in your "walmartization," spent his dissertation studying the drinking habits of the British during the 19th century. Is anyone in our discipline studying video games? Not yet, but rest assured we will be.
But the physicality of the quarter doesn't make anything more certain.
Well sure it does. You yourself said that he's going to probably give me a free game, and while the physicality of the quarter may not necessarily help in that situation, my own physical presence does. He knows, because I stand in front of him, that this is not the 1037th time I've tried to steal a game. But with physical presence removed and replaced with equal amounts of anonymity, the content producer has to assume that every person who wants a free claim is, in fact, doing it for the 1037th time with a script.
The same could be said of any kind of online payment system, to be sure, from McCloud's dream arcade to Amazon.com to ebay. But the difference with micropayments, and particularly in the online gaming he's talking about where there is no physical product whatsoever, is that the dangers associated with online payments are exponentially increased.
With regards to my assertion that the Pac-McCloud virtual arcade cabinet can "steal" a quarter while a physical one cannot, you're right. You would have to activate it. But after you do that, your pocket's open, right?